Nedship Bank N.V. v. Zoodotis (The), docket T-186-99

Date: 20001107

Docket: T-186-99

BETWEEN:

     NEDSHIP BANK N.V. PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS

     NEDERLANDSE SCHEEPSHYPOTHEEKBANK N.V.,

     Plaintiff,

     - and -

     THE OWNERS AND ALL OTHERS

     INTERESTED IN THE SHIP "ZOODOTIS"

     AND ZOODOTIS NAVIGATION INC.,

     Defendants.

     REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

BLAIS, J.

[1]      This is a motion for the following Orders:

(a)      an Order striking out the Affidavit of Rene Krijthe sworn on the 26th day of June, 2000 (adopting the Affidavits of Arij Jan Noordermeer sworn on the 15th day of January, 1999; the 31st day of March, 1999; the 21st day of December, 1999, pursuant to the Order of Mr. John A. Hargrave, Prothonotary, dated the 18th day of May, 2000);

(b)      an Order striking out the Affidavits of Arij Jan Noordermeer sworn on the 15th day of January, 1999; the 31st day of March, 1999; the 21st day of December, 1999;

(c)      in the alternative, an Order that the plaintiff and Rene Krijthe provide to the solicitors for Tramp within thirty (30) days of the date of any Order which this Honourable Court may make, responses to each of the requests for further information or for production of further documents made by Mr. Krijthe on his cross-examination by counsel for Tramp conducted on June 28 and 29, 2000, which requests are listed in Schedule "A" to the Notice of Motion.

[2]      Both parties submitted their arguments relating to objections to a number of questions raised by the plaintiff; I will address them separately.

Question 314:

[3]      Loan documents sought are for a different loan which is not relevant to the claim. The objection is sustained.

Question 320:

[4]      In my view, this question has already been answered. The objection is sustained.

Question 388 and 1868:

[5]      Upon being satisfied that the respondent has agreed to provide the applicant with information and the status of steps being taken to recover against the Peter Lygnos Estate, that constitutes an admission and I see no need to go further than that on this question. The objection is sustained.

Question 690:

[6]      Upon being satisfied that Prothonotary Hargrave declined to allow production of these documents in the related file (Royal Bank of Scotland Golden Trinity Application) and upon being satisfied that the Court should be consistent. The objection is sustained.

Question 979:

[7]      Upon being satisfied that information with respect to the Bank's consideration and decision in that respect has been provided in the course of the cross-examination, it is not necessary for the Bank to provide other documents which are not identified. The objection is sustained.

Page 261, 1. 17:

[8]      Upon being satisfied that the information has been already provided it does not justify to provide further documentation on addenda. The objection is sustained.

Question 1244-1246:

[9]      Upon being satisfied with the scope of the question and that the information requested could be relevant, I understand that the respondent has already agreed to provide the information requested as far as the manager in Piraeus and his assistant who administered the loan in question are concerned, and I agree that the request shall cover all members of the credit committee that were involved with this loan. The objection is dismissed.

Question 1298:

[10]      It seems that the information has probably already been provided, so the respondent will provide the documents requested if not provided already. The objection is dismissed.

Question 1387:

[11]      In my view this question has already been answered through question 1389. The objection is sustained.

[12]      Upon being satisfied that counsel for Nedship Bank N.V. has clearly agreed to provide information referring to certain questions; The plaintiff shall, within 45 days of this Order, provide information as sought and provide documents if they exist referring to question numbers:

312; 313; 317; 340; p. 110, 1.9 and following (and Q. 1675); 496; 840 and p. 219, 119; 957; 963; 965; 968; 971; 974; 981; 1039; 1040; 1049; 1101; 1104; 1214 to 1216; 1221; 1222; 1227; 1228; 1232; 1233; 1234; 1289; 1291; 1295; p. 353, 1.2' p. 353, 1. 24; 1367; 1423; p.403, 1. 8; 1675; 1686; 1690; 1695; p. 448, 1. 7; 1699; 1700; 1701; 1723; 1724; 1726 and 1727.1

[13]      Both parties made representations relating to costs. Given the long period of time since cross-examination of Mr. Krijthe on June 28 and 29, 2000 and the numerous requests following by counsel for the claimant to get the production of further documents following the cross-examination, in my opinion, the claimant is entitled to costs that are established to $600.00 payable forthwith.

                             (Sgd.) "Pierre Blais"

                                 Judge

November 7, 2000

Vancouver, British Columbia

     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     TRIAL DIVISION

     NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                  T-186-99

STYLE OF CAUSE:          Nedship Bank N.V.

                     v.

                     The Ship "Zoodotis" et al

PLACE OF HEARING:          Vancouver, British Columbia

DATE OF HEARING:          November 6, 2000

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER OF BLAIS, J.

DATED:                  November 7, 2000

APPEARANCES:

Mr. Peter G. Bernard              For the Plaintiff

Mr. R. Glenn Morgan              For the Defendant, Tramp Oil & Marine Limited

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Campney & Murphy

Barristers and Solicitors

Vancouver, BC              For the Plaintiff

Davis & Company

Barristers and Solicitors

Vancouver, BC              For the Defendant, Tramp Oil & Marine Limited

__________________

¹The parties have agreed that there was a mistake in the written representations and that the question numbered 1728 should be replaced by question 1727.